The Baculum Was Gained and Lost Multiple Times During Mammalian Evolution Nicholas G

Integrative and Comparative Biology Advance Access published June 1, 2016 Integrative and Comparative Biology Integrative and Comparative Biology, pp. 1–13 doi:10.1093/icb/icw034 Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology SYMPOSIUM The Baculum was Gained and Lost Multiple Times during Mammalian Evolution Nicholas G. Schultz,* Michael Lough-Stevens,* Eric Abreu,† Teri Orr‡ and Matthew D. Dean1,* *Molecular and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, 1050 Childs Way, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA; †West Adams Preparatory High School, 1500 W Washington Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90007, USA; ‡Department of Biology, University of Utah, 257 South 1400 East, Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0840, USA Downloaded from From the symposium ‘‘The Morphological Diversity of Intromittent Organs’’ presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, January 4, 2016 at Portland, Oregon. 1E-mail: [email protected] http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/ Synopsis The rapid evolution of male genitalia is a nearly ubiquitous pattern across sexually reproducing organisms, likely driven by the evolutionary pressures of male–male competition, male–female interactions, and perhaps pleiotropic effects of selection. The penis of many mammalian species contains a baculum, a bone that displays astonishing morphological diversity. The evolution of baculum size and shape does not consistently correlate with any aspects of mating system, hindering our understanding of the evolutionary processes affecting it. One potential explanation for the lack of consistent comparative results is that the baculum is not actually a homologous structure. If the baculum of different groups evolved independently, then the assumption of homology inherent in comparative studies is violated. Here, we at Univ of Southern California on June 1, 2016 specifically test this hypothesis by modeling the presence/absence of bacula of 954 mammalian species across a well- established phylogeny and show that the baculum evolved a minimum of nine times, and was lost a minimum of ten times. Three different forms of bootstrapping show our results are robust to species sampling. Furthermore, groups with a baculum show evidence of higher rates of diversification. Our study offers an explanation for the inconsistent results in the literature, and provides insight into the evolution of this remarkable structure. Introduction classic signature that suggests the baculum is a Characterizing the evolutionary forces that drive rapid target of recurrent adaptive evolution. divergence of morphological structures is fundamental Several hypotheses for the function of the baculum to understanding adaptation, speciation, and the diver- have been proposed which lead to testable predic- sity of life. Across nearly all sexually reproducing or- tions in a comparative framework. Unfortunately, ganisms, male genital anatomy evolves more rapidly comparative studies have failed to yield general and than other morphological structures (Eberhard 1985; consistent results (summarized in Table 1). One hy- Romer and Parsons 1986; Klaczko et al. 2015). In fact, pothesis is that the baculum protects the urethra and male genitals diverge so rapidly that taxonomists often provides mechanical support during copulation use them to distinguish closely related species that are (Long and Frank 1968; Oosthuizen and Miller otherwise morphologically indistinguishable (Wade 2000; Dyck et al. 2004). Dixson found that in pin- and Gilbert 1940; Hamilton 1949; Adams and Sutton nipeds and primates, species with prolonged intro- 1968; Patterson and Thaeler 1982; Simson et al. 1993). mission tended to have more elongate bacula The baculum is a bone that occurs in the penis of (Dixson 1987a, 1987b, 1995, 1998). However, many mammal species, and they display astonishing across 52 species of carnivores, baculum length did morphological diversity (Chaine 1925; Eadie 1947; not covary with intromission duration (Larivie`re and Burt 1960; Romer and Parsons 1986; Dixson 1995; Ferguson 2002). Although Dixson (1995) concluded Weimann et al. 2014). Qualitatively, interspecific di- that carnivores with increased intromission length vergence exceeds intraspecific polymorphism, a had longer bacula, that study did not incorporate ß The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology. All rights reserved. For permissions please email: [email protected]. 2 N. G. Schultz et al. Table 1 Hypothesized functions for the baculum, their predictions, and their support (or not) among comparative studies Hypothesized function Prediction Prediction supported Not supported Protect the urethra during Species with prolonged intromission should Primatesa,b, Carnivoresc Carnivoresd copulation have longer bacula Functions in the context of Baculum length positively covaries with Rodentse, Carnivorese Batse,f, Primatese sperm competition inferred mating system Baculum length negatively covaries with Pinnipedsg Carnivoresd sexual size dimorphism Baculum morphology predicts paternity under Miceh,i — competitive conditions Stimulates female to ovulate Species with induced ovulation have longer bacula — Carnivoresc,d or implant Signals male quality Baculum displays positive allometry Muskratsj, Sealsk,l Martensm, Micen, Batso aDixson (1987a); bDixson (1987b); cDixson (1995); dLarivie`re and Ferguson (2002); eRamm (2007); fHosken et al. (2001); gFitzpatrick et al. (2012); hStockley et al. (2013); iSimmons and Firman (2014); jTasikas et al. (2009); kMiller and Burton (2001); lMiller et al. (1999); mSchulte- Downloaded from Hostedde et al. (2011); nRamm et al. (2010); oLu¨pold et al. (2004). modern methods to account for phylogenetic in ever larger bacula, and a positive allometric rela- relationships. tionship should arise (but see Bonduriansky 2007). http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/ Another set of hypotheses maintain the baculum The relationships between baculum size and body functions in different aspects of the mating system, size are inconsistent, ranging from positive allometry for example, by stimulating the female in a way (Miller et al. 1999; Miller and Burton 2001; Tasikas that biases paternity toward a particular male et al. 2009), to isometry or even negative allometry (male–female interactions), assisting in the removal (Lu¨pold et al. 2004; Ramm et al. 2010; Schulte- of sperm from prior males (sperm competition to Hostedde et al. 2011). increase ‘‘offensive’’ strategies of males), or by induc- In sum, there are no consistent relationships being damage to the female to inhibit remating (sexual tween features of the baculum and organismal biol- at Univ of Southern California on June 1, 2016 conflict to increase ‘‘defensive’’ strategies of males). ogy (Table 1), hindering our understanding of the These latter two hypotheses predict a correlation be- evolutionary forces affecting their morphological di- tween baculum morphology and the inferred risk or versity. There are at least five potential explanations intensity of sperm competition. In an experimental to reconcile inconsistencies from the literature. First, evolution study within a single species of mouse, nearly all studies in Table 1 focus on the length of males evolved relatively wider bacula when subjected the baculum, and shape may be a more important to a (Simmons and Firman 2014), lending support to parameter to test some of these hypotheses the hypothesis that bacula function in the context of (Baryshnikov et al. 2003; Stockley et al. 2013). sperm competition. Across rodents and carnivores, Unfortunately, modern morphometric techniques baculum length increased with the inferred intensity have only recently begun being applied to studies of sperm competition (Ramm 2007), but no such of baculum morphology (Schultz et al. forthcoming correlation was found in bats or primates (Hosken 2016). Second, the baculum may function in distinct et al. 2001; Ramm 2007). A corollary prediction is biological processes across species, so that correla- that baculum length negatively covaries with the tions to one group’s biology need not apply to an- degree of sexual dimorphism, since very strong di- other’s (Patterson and Thaeler 1982; Kelly 2000). morphism often indicates that males are investing Third, the baculum may evolve so rapidly that it disproportionately in precopulatory rather than post- outpaces evolutionary correlation to other characters. copulatory competition (Parker et al. 2013; Lu¨pold et Fourth, the baculum may function in different con- al. 2014; Dines et al. 2015). In some pinnipeds, there texts across species, as evidenced by heterogeneity in was a negative correlation between sexual size dimor- its morphological placement. For example, in some phism and baculum size (Fitzpatrick et al. 2012), but groups the baculum is at the distal extreme of the this pattern was not observed across other carnivores glans, while in others it is more deeply embedded (Larivie`re and Ferguson 2002). proximally (Patterson 1983). If large bacula somehow indicate male quality A fifth hypothesis, and the main topic of the cur- (Miller and Burton 2001; Lu¨pold et al. 2004), then rent study, is that the baculum evolved more than relatively fit males should invest disproportionately once. If the baculum has similarly evolved multiple Evolution of bacula in mammals 3 times, then the baculum should not be considered a is a small fraction of the over 5000 mammalian spe- homologous structure, in that it was not

Load more